CRITICS FUME OVER EPA'S IMPENDING CLEAN AIR RULES

Northeast Ohio business owners are frustrated and confused over government efforts to toughen the nation's clean air laws.
After years of grappling to comply with the requirements of the 1990 Clean Air Act, businesses and municipalities nationwide are bracing for a new round of regulations from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Critics say the new rules that are scheduled to go into effect in July not only could affect more businesses, but also could throw whole geographical regions out of compliance with air quality regulations.
Anxiety has mounted among large and small businesses alike affected by the EPA's intention to tighten its so-called National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The rules govern ozone emissions and airborne particles, and many companies, especially those connected to manufacturing, say they simply can't gauge what effect the new rules might have on their bottom lines.
'There's a lot of frustration out there,' said Jim Krimmel, president of Zaclon Inc., a company in Independence that makes chemicals for metal galvanizing. Small businesses finally have an understanding of the Clean Air Act, the permitting process and all the paperwork, and here comes another set of rules.'
Mr. Krimmel has joined other critics, including Gov. Voinovich, members of Congress and business advocacy groups, who claim the new rules are overly restrictive. Many business groups not only have filed complaints about the proposed regulations with the agency, but have called on members such as Mr. Krimmel to testify individually before Congress and to submit written comments opposing the new rules.
Still, many business people believe their voices won't be heard by the EPA.
'I'm not sure there's a whole lot we can do,' said Ed Pruc, president of T&B Foundry, a gray metal casting company in Cleveland. 'We've been through this before and have just gotten used to the earlier rules.'
In particular, the proposal to reduce to 2.5 microns from 10 microns the size of airborne particles that company plants legally could emit leads opponents to claim the EPA would be regulating air pollution sources as small as lawn mowers and backyard barbecues.
They also say detection equipment to measure such small particulates hasn't been developed for practical use, and that the air quality improvements achieved under the rules would be insignificant compared to the cost of enforcing them.
While admitting technology and cost factors are unclear, the EPA staunchly defends its new re-strictions. The public comment period required before the rules are finalized has been extended until Wednesday, March 12, but the EPA hasn't altered its plans to implement the rules in July.
'Our science is good and we conferred with independent scientists who agreed that significant health benefits would occur from tighter regulation of ozone precursors and smaller particles,' said John Summerhays, en-vironmental scientist with EPA's Chicago regional office.
But small businessmen such as Messrs. Krimmel and Pruc remain unconvinced.
'We are concerned about how much this will cost,' Mr. Pruc said. 'We do a lot of sand reclamation and storage, and we can't even figure out how we would measure sand particles of that size. I think the EPA's expectations are too high.'